ShuRugal

man, i clicked on this thinking it was going to be focused on contrast visibility options for the color-blind. But what's shown here with other sims converting visual cues to audio cues is wild. i never would have even imagined this.

another possible fix i think would work well and be realistic to crew procedures would be that if George is set to "free fire" and you bug a target he identified as friendly, he should switch back to weapons tight and say something like "please confirm, that target looks friendly".

an issue i keep running into with George is he will ignore a mission target to lock onto a SAM battery 20 miles behind the target. I'm really looking forward to the "search in PFZ" function just announced to help solve this.

does the "invisible" flag on a unit not hide it from George? haven't tested, but i would expect it to.

that looks amazing. just the FCR handover and target point search features will be amazing. Search in PFZ is something i never even thought to ask for.

it's also worth keeping in mind that the Longbow radar does not display raw radar returns, but attempts to identify and classify targets against an internal database. If the return doesn't match anything in the database, it will not be displayed to the crew. While something like a shahed drone SHOULD come back classified as a fixed-wing aircraft, something that small is pushing the boundary of what the designers anticipated the system being used for.

1. are your radios turned on? 2. is the mic switch set to one of the radios? 3. are you pushing the keybind for the microphone?

the yellow light indicates that you are in EFFECTIVE range, not MAXIMUM range. effective range is determined by the spread of the weapon vs the programmed target size. as you can see from the salvo you fired here, even with the light on, you still have a spread large enough for a tank to fit comfortably between even the closest rockets in a salvo. yes, 900 meters is a reasonable max effective range for unguided rockets fired from a helicopter. If you want a longer effective range, use ATGMs, that's why they were invented: because rockets kinda suck.

using aircraft rockets for indirect fire is really only useful for attacking a pre-planned target like a factory or an entire airport. As you have discovered, managing any semblance of accuracy with indirect fire requires flying extremely precise delivery profiles. IRL, planning an indirect fire profile for a helicopter would look something like: identify target position on map identify desired approach direction identify minimum acceptable range to close with target area compute required airspeed, release angle, altitude, and heading for firing. get weather data and correct release parameters for projected atmospheric conditions (air density, wind) adjust for coriolis effects identify two visiual landmarks along the required firing line brief pilots on visual landmarks, required airspeed, release angle, release altitude, and "do not cross" line/altitude basically, everything you have to do for a regular rocket artillery strike, plus accounting for the fact that the launcher is flying.

you did not select FCR as your sight, as indicated by "P-HMD" in the lower left of the IHADSS.

you might try clicking on the power lever without moving it? in some DCS modules, that toggles between off an idle position, but i don't know if it works in the AH64

check your axis bindings. throttle axis probably got bound to something you didn't expect. this is nearly always the culprit with analog axii jumping around.

alongside this, it would be REALLY nice if we could get a callsign plate in the cockpit of every module which refelcts the unit name entered in mission editor.

I know this doesn't achieve the solution you are looking for, but have you tried using the IHADDs on your right eye? You may actually find that having the display on your non-dominant eye improves your "stick and pedals" flying, as it makes paying attention to the display a much more deliberate action, and getting over-focused on the display is something that gives a lot of people trouble (unconsciously trying to fly the HUD instead of the aircraft). I overcome this problem myself by keeping the "hide HMD" binding on my HOTAS so i can kick it out of my vision when i'm not doing something that NEEDS it. If you've already tried this, then feel free to tell me to eff off.

yeah, that's definitely one of the harder pieces of life advice to adhere to. absolutely worth it, though. I have never regretted resisting the temptation, and i have never failed to regret giving in.

That describes every single post the user you are arguing with has ever made on this forum. report the user for trolling, add to your ignore list, and move on. You've expended more activity arguing with this one troll than the suggestion forum typically sees in a week. There's no point in wasting your energy having a conversation with this user. It doesn't matter what you say or how correct you are, the troll will continue to troll you.

For LL entry, the correct format looks like this: N742594W1205768 6 digit lattitude 7 digit longitude lat is 2 digit degrees + 4 digit decimal degrees long is 3 digit degrees + 4 digit decimal degrees Just tested the string above and it was accepted.

"chief, i need you to stay tethered to the intercom and walk with me while we taxi"

or just key up ground and say "request progressive taxi"

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/userfiles/c9d/o5cvb59ynp0q1jbyf6buqhcdvqmg2rjz/167th_Liberation_of_Gecitkale_SEAD-DEAD-CAS.miz here ya go. if you want to fly it with someone, gimme a yell, i can spin my server up for it.

There's also an additional problem on top of this: player's don't WANT realistic SAM deployments. A few years ago, i sat down and made a mission on the premise of an unnamed PMC (wagner, duh) snatching up a Russian AD brigade and doing a terrorism on the island of Cyprus with it. After thoroughly researching publicly available data, i settled on: 1 S200 battery - this unit was using it's long-range capability to shut down civil aviation around the island 2 tracking radar, 1 search radar, 10 TELARs, kamaz trucks with reloads 1 S300 battery - this unit was providing medium-range protection for the S200 battery 1 trailer-mounted search radar, 1 mast-mounted search radar, 2 mast-mounted tracking radars, kamaz trucks with reloads 1 2S6 company - this unit was broken up and mixed in with the S200 and S300 batteries to provide SHORAD 6 2S6 Tunguska + kamaz trucks 1 infantry air-defense company - this unit was broken up and mixed in with everything to provide SHORAD backup for the 2S6 units 2 platoons of regular infantry 2 platoons of IGLA manpads (40 total tubes) 1 light armor company - puling perimeter security against a ground attack 20 BTRs set up in prepared positions providing overwatch of approaches to the SAM site people HATED this mission. I spent a <profanity>LOAD of time carefully positioning the units to provide mutual support, but to also allow gaps which players could exploit. I selected a siting which gave players an option to approach with terrain masking providing a safe low-altitude loiter area near the target site. I created detailed briefing plates showing approximate unit positions, threat envelopes for each unit type, and safe routes of approach. I made sure that it was possible for a single player to clear the mission with careful planning and execution (and a willingness to go back for reloads). I added a trigger for deploying an AFAC drone after killing the S200 and S300 targeting radars, to make spotting ground units easier. none of that mattered. players universally fired off a couple HARMs, then proceeded to overfly the target at treetop level and get plastered by the SHORAD units. Rotary players either tried to fly in at 1,000 feet (and got plastered by the S300) or tried to sneak into gun range (and got plastered by the 2S6).

What player-interactive mechanisms are you proposing to add to the game to simulate maintenance cycles? Real life military aviation units don't fly aircraft that are not being maintained, except in the most extreme of circumstances. Barring examples like the RuAF duct-taping Garmins to the console, serious militaries don't fly aircraft which have inoperable mission-critical systems. Those aircraft get marked as 'down' and pilots fly aircraft which are not behind on their Mx. From the perspective of a pilot, aircraft readiness is a non-issue. aircraft readiness is a problem for the squadron commander to worry about for planning missions. which is why debriefing is a thing. maintainers review the tattler systems in the aircraft to check for things like "engine operated beyond rated limits" or "aircraft over-G'd" and talk to the pilot to find out any additional relevant information, and then perform spot inspections, or even immediately deadline the aircraft. This gets done after every single mission, combat or otherwise, so that maintenance can be performed as-required to address issues as they arise. In real life, it is rare for pilots to be assigned to only fly the same exact hull#, pilots are assigned to missions based on crew rest status, and aircraft are assigned to missions based on aircraft maintenance status. With that in mind, what actual gameplay mechanics are you proposing? are you asking for an "airframe and powerplant simulation" minigame? are you proposing that the start of each mission includes the crew chief chewing out the pilot for banging up his bird in the last mission? For the briefing to just tell the player how many hulls in the squadron are operational?

using the FCR to direct the gun feels like cheating. sight -> FCR acq -> PHMD FCR FOV -> zoom look at target single scanburst pull trigger dead vehicle

that was super fun. aircraft walking sideways off the deck.

Military aircraft definitely DO do this sort of thing. the F-14 weighs 3/4 as much as a Boeing 737-100, but has only about 1/4 the tire contact area, and a 15% narrower width between the main landing gear, and 30% less distance between the nose and main gear. the F-14 will absolutely have far less ground stability than a civil aircraft of similar weight would be expected to have. Fighters are a tradeoff between usability and performance, and they tend to favor performance over ease-of-use, especially cold-war era designs. Tires are bulky and heavy, which means that traction on the ground costs performance in the air. What is your typical airspeed on landing? both your speed as you pass over the runway threshold, and your speed at touchdown? I have noticed that it is common for DCS players to carry far too much airspeed during landing, and "it skids all over the place" is a common symptom of touching down with too much speed.